The New Military

Most weapons research at ATS focuses on big weapons. However, biotech-nanotech fusions are extremely advanced and already have taken us into uncharted
waters. Current projects marry biological parts to machine parts and create fully integrated systems. The related sciences include stem cell research,
gene therapy, GMO plant technology - and much more. This project looks beyond the Talons and Terminators to evaluate microscopic weapons, and
hopefully, give us a more realistic picture of the New Military.

There is evidence that the military already has self-powered microbot and nanobot weapons - which are just incidentally, capable of reproducing. This
project looks at state-of-the-art technology that puts everything all together - AI, self-powered microbots, breeding robots - and all the other
latest innovations...

* Researchers wanted. Please u2u me if you're interested in this project. FYI - It's a component of a larger project on the corporate NWO.

The following links provide some background and a basic overview of the science, economics and politics. There is overlap, but most ATS threads have
unique gems buried in the posts. Enjoy the maze.

2000 - "One of the projects DARPA is currently supporting is work by a team at Michigan State University's College of Engineering, who are
developing reconfigurable micro-robots for use in military, intelligence and law enforcement ...."

i will be focusing on robotic soldiers. this is a bog topic and i could use help. if you want to help, u2u ADVISOR to get a "scholar" status and
then u2u soficrow for more information.

Robotic Soldiers

Dallas - Raytheon Systems Co. is mapping out an ambitious program for building an artificial nervous system (ANS) for the soldier of the
future. The ANS will enable autonomous robots to utilize low-power, lightweight, nanotechnology-sized analog computers that communicate using secure
digital pulsecodes. The military-funded project seeks to create autonomous robots capable of data fusion, mission planning, real-time learning and
innovative responses in novel battlefield situations.

The design will be topped off with the Cog artificial head from MIT-a four-eyed sensor platform ...

Lightweight, super-strong robots will lead human soldiers into battle within 10 years -- at least according to iRobot.

The robots, called small unmanned ground vehicles, or SUGVs, will detect the presence of chemical and biological weapons, identify targets for
artillery and infantrymen, and ferret out snipers hiding inside urban buildings. Today, humans mainly perform these tasks, often becoming the first
casualties of battle while looking for snipers or explosives.

Who We Are
We provide a versatile family of combat systems that represent the way the Army will fight wars in the future. We will field an integrated system of
combat systems in blocks until the full objective capability is realized to meet the goals of Army Transformation. These systems will incorporate the
latest technologies for mobility, lethality, sensor platforms, and survivability. Unit of action will represent a technological revolution in combat
operations ensuring success on the future battlefield.

ROBOT soldiers manufactured to kill enemy troops have been designed for the Pentagon by a tiny Glasgow computer company which is set to make
millions from the deal.
Essential Viewing says the technology comes straight from the world of science fiction. Chief executive Simon Hardy said the technology had its
nearest equivalent in the Star Wars movie Attack Of The Clones.

Techno-war
DARPA, the agency behind these Buck Rogers weapons systems, has a mixed track record, somewhere between silly and sobering. The mechanical elephant it
developed for the Vietnam War was not a keeper, and one doubts that the robot canine for the army, aptly dubbed "Big Dog", will ever get off the
drawing boards. But DARPA also gave us stealth technology, such as the M-16 rifle, cruise missiles and the unmanned Predator armed with the deadly
Hellfire missile.

It is currently deploying a carbon-dioxide laser to spot snipers in Iraq, as well as a "sonic" weapon that can supposedly disable demonstrators at
274 meters with a 145-decibel blast of sound.

The New Military will face several technical hurdles before it can be realized. The technology is advancing quite rapidly in some areas, and very
slowly in others. To fix this disparity, the government has been requesting a number of white papers from private sector scientists in R&D, civies
with clever ideas, in addition to those labs already working under military contracts.

I've been scanning over the requested tecnology, the areas the government really needs help with, and the one that sticks out at me is power
generation. To some extent this is where the bio-machines come in, but they are far from complete implementation. The more universal need is for
fuel cells, batteries, similar energy storage and transfer devices.

All the nifty toys in the world won't do you any good with dead batteries. There is some truly amazing weapons technology in the fields of
microwave, laser, electro magnetics, and other high energy systems -- but that's just the problem. High Energy systems require a lot of juice.
There are dozens of platforms that simply don't generate enough electricity to make the weapons feasible.

There is only one boat that generates sufficient power to utilize any of these new weapons effectively. There are no aircraft, save one specially
configured commercial jumbo jet that can fire a High Energy laser. There are no wheeled or tracked vehicles that generate enough power, nor are there
any practical man-portable backpack models. Therefore, much of the advancement in these fields (High Energy Applications) is going to waste because
it can't be brought to bear on any target outside the lab.

bccresearch.com...
The above is a link to a privately marketed study on the subject that is several years old. The actual study is pay-per-view, but look at the table
of contents for an idea of the situation four or five years ago, it hasn't changed much. The government is still desperately seeking breakthroughs,
and the private sector is charging exhorbitant fees for information that should be free.

Contemporary military tech has evolved to use as little power as possible, to extend battery life, cut down on battery weight, and generally make the
weapons more battlefield capable. A good example of this trend is evidenced in shoulder fired SAM and LAW weapons. The weapons had to be light,
reliable, and have a reasonable shelf life, while at the same time they require a large amount of STEADY power to collect targetting data, run
software, and in most cases initiate the primer of the ordinance. If you want nightvision, or infrared, or if you want to project a radar/laser beam
on the target you need still more power.

The military designers have been walking a delicate tightrope for years, and unfortunately the weapons have now evolved far ahead of energy storage
capabilities. The batteries used by the military for most applications are suprisingly unadvanced. Let's take a look..

There is another problem, and that is a lack of standards for battery size, interoperability, and power sharing between international forces, and in
some cases even between the reserves and regulars of the same force (due to new support and weapons systems being granted to front line troops first).
Here's a VERY short list of different power profiles for some various tech.

That is a partial list for one (1) company. There are a large number of suppliers for various segments of the American armed forces, and even more
when you consider NATO, the UN, or any other force amalgam.

Another logistics problem facing the military is the tendency of batteries to 'leak' energy over time. Check out the link below. (They also have
many links on the below site to other High Energy Applications, check them out.) www.defense-update.com...

There are technologies available to track the power drain and even correct it, but they add signifigantly to the cost of the battery, and the cost of
the maintenance schedule. See below. www.defense-update.com...

There do exist solar battery chargers, and solar power sources, but none of them are able to handle the load alone. There have been recent advances
in coupling thermal chargers and visble light chargers into one unit. However the advances have not been implimented. See the link below for an
example of solar battery tech and field panels. www.oksolar.com...

Fuel cells are another area of enormous interest, for me personally and apparently for those in military procurement. The government has been going
gaga over fuel cells, privately of course so as not to ruin their oil investments. The idea is to acheive the right balance between portability,
power on demand, and storage capacity.

Here's a very brief primer on how fuel cells work, and the site has some good links as well to keep yourself informed as to upcoming research goals,
new projects, and publicized advances. www.solarnavigator.net...

Here's a short list of the companies doing research in the area. The interests listed below are the primary competitors for the juiciest contracts.
There are others, but if asked by an investor, this is the 'diversified' list I would give. These are the companies most heavily invested in fuel
cell research, and those companies with the most to gain by marketting and liscensing new technology.

None of them have cracked the real nut yet, but it's assured that whoever does will have more lucrative liscensing contracts than they can handle,
assuming they don't get taken over and muscled out. I'm not going to provide links to the official sites of each company, that seems like a bit of
a waste of space. A quick internet search using the company name should be sufficient to pull up their web presence, for anyone interested.

The 3rd annual conference on Aerospace and Military Fuel Cells was held in Washington last September. They talked about the state of the science, and
the needs of the government moving forward. www.ttcus.com...

Here's another that was held in California, regarding the state of military fuel cell applications over the next five years. www.fuelcelltoday.com...

There has been an enormous amount of interest in this technology, both in military and private circles. Here's a forward looking statement about the
market for fuel cells over the next decade. This is just one opinion, but most agree the growth potential is enormous. www.abiresearch.com...

There are obvious military applications for both generator, mid-sized vehicle-mounted, and man portable micro fuel cells. It's almost impossible to
quantify the number of uses fuel cells would have if they were properly refined. There are of course many different types of fuel cells, utilizing
many different processes to generate power. I don't want to turn this into a thread about fuel cells, but they do have some finer points worth
discussing, perhaps more in depth later. The link below is a good summary of what the military needs in a fuel cell, however there are as many
possible forms as their are applications. www.dtic.mil...

Here's some more information on military applications of fuel cell technology, and some advances that were made in the area of efficiency. www.military.com...

I would caution anyone who thinks they can just do a web search and come up with the really good stuff. The in depth analysis, breakthrough tech, and
non-standard applications are expensive to access. In order to get down and dirty and provide a real concrete analysis, investment grade analysis, I
would end up spending 20-30k dollars on subscriptions, white papers, research results, and other information commodities. Of course, there is more
than one way to skin a cat.

I will be back with more on this and other topics very soon! (Just as soon as I'm done figuring out how to skin this here cat.)

My thanks goes out to Soficrow for inviting me to join this interesting
project. I look forward to working with all of you in the coming weeks and
months.

I will be splitting my work up into 5(lengthly) parts, and after that who knows.

Part I – Brief history of technological innovation over the past 50 years, and
where the trends seem to be taking us – Factual non speculative information
will be the motto of this part. ETA – 2 Weeks Related ATS Threadswww.abovetopsecret.com...

Part II – Roles early Robotic and "Enhanced" Human soldiers will fill in future
wars(2025+ AD) – Mostly specualative stuff, might need some help on this
one from someone who knows the military better then I do. ETA – 1 Month Related ATS Threadswww.abovetopsecret.com...www.abovetopsecret.com...

Part III – Who will be conducting the wars of the future? - Again pure speculation
based on current day trends. ETA – N/A Related ATS Threadswww.abovetopsecret.com...

Part IV – Post Nucular Superweapons – Nanobots, Superthermite Explosives
and the Grey Goo scenario(as well as an outline and explanation of all the other types
of "Goo Weapons") ETA – N/A Related ATS Threadswww.abovetopsecret.com...

Part V – Worst Case scenario and ways we can avoid it – I will paint my vision
of the worst case scenario, this part is going to be very bleak. I will try to balance this
part out with positive information like how we can avoid things like runaway Nanobots,
Artificial Bio/Chem weapons, Hi-Tech Terrorism and Corporate Feudalism. ETA – N/A

It's been a while since I last did an information dump, so I've got some real goodies to share. I was so upset by the lack of good, free research,
I started hunting for back doors and discarded gems. I found some.

Overview - Interesting Tidbits on a Number of Topics Related to the New Military and the Changing Global Climate in Terms of War and Urban Living.

Riccardo Petrella, director of science and technology forecasting for the European Community agrees. His view is that by the mid 21st Century, the
“real decision-making powers… will be transnational companies in alliance with city-regional governments.” These Petrella believes, could form
a “high-tech archipelago… amid seas of impoverished humanity.”

In the Golem project (Genetically Organized Lifelike Electro Mechanics) we conducted a set of experiments in which simple electro-mechanical systems
evolved from scratch to yield physical locomoting machines. Like biological lifeforms whose structure and function exploit the behaviors afforded by
their own chemical and mechanical medium, our evolved creatures take advantage of the nature of their own medium - thermoplastic, motors, and
artificial neurons. We thus achieve autonomy of design and construction using evolution in a limited universe physical simulation, coupled to
off-the-shelf rapid manufacturing technology. This is the first time robots have been robotically designed and robotically fabricated.

Analysis of Animal Movement for the Purposes of Designing Robots to be as Effecient in Their Behaviors as Animals

A new computer vision system for automated analysis of animal movement -- honey bee activities, in particular -- is expected to accelerate animal
behavior research, which also has implications for biologically inspired design of robots and computers.

This paper introduces a dynamics simulator designed to aid the development of control algorithms for biologicallyinspired robots. We describe the
simulator and a two-tier framework for control code interfacing that allows control code to be written in a standard object-oriented language(C++),
but encapsulates such code to produce modular, reusable, distributed controllers with parameterizable input-output transmission properties such as
delay, sampling rate, and noise.

My first post will address the Ethic of Nano Technology in the Military as well as the civilian world.

Ethics. A word with a different definition for everyone asked. In an attempt to cover the ethics of Nano Tech, I will first present the
Miriam—Webster’s definition of Ethics:

Pronunciation: 'e-thik
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English ethik, from Middle French ethique, from Latin ethice, from Greek EthikE, from Ethikos
1 plural but singular or plural in construction : the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation
2 a : a set of moral principles or values b : a theory or system of moral values c plural but singular or plural in construction : the principles of
conduct governing an individual or a group d : a guiding philosophy

A guiding philosophy. What is the guiding philosophy of Nano Technology? At the moment, DARPA and Honeywell (under the direction of Sandia National
Laboratory) is the main researcher’s in Nano Technologies. The NSF and the DOD is funding DARPA and Honeywell for R and D of new and existing Nano
Technologies. Since the Government is the largest sponsor of R and D in Nano Technology (which from here on out will be referred to as NT) we should
consider what ethic they have put forth into development.

We will look at the benefits and pitfalls of NT in order to better understand how the Government is applying its guiding philosophy.

Some of the most obvious benefits include:

Microscopic garbage and waste nano bots that disassemble the
material on a molecular level for recycling.

Precision manufacturing of goods

Replication

Miniaturization

Pharmaceutical Creation

Disease Treatment

Nanomachine-assisted Surgery

Toxin Cleanup

Recycling

Resource Consumption Reduction

Extended life expectancy

These benefits also harbor potential dangers with them as well. Some of the more obvious dangers of NT are:

The benefits are much more numerous than the potential dangers, but take another look at what the dangers are.

Miniature Weapons and Explosives:

We can all imagine an army comprised of millions upon millions of little nano bots. However, those applications are still a way off. The major
components of nano tech in the military usage today are for precision telemetry.

Because of their small size (0.025-inch spacing), nano-miniature connectors have been chosen for JTA telemetry applications……Sandia
National Laboratory personnel reviewed various connector specifications including MIL-PRF-83513, DESC 94031 and Nanonics specification N10138 to
determine appropriate mechanical, electrical, and environmental requirements for nano-connectors in weapon systems. Actual testing was performed by
Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies (FM&T). Additional fretting corrosion testing was performed by Sandia National Laboratory in
conjunction with New Mexico State University.

Actual weaponry as we know it is still far from microscopic, but progress is being made towards the miniaturization of explosives and ordinance.

The Small Smart Bomb is a 250 pound weapon that has the same penetration capabilities as a 2000lb BLU-109, but with only 50 pounds of
explosive. With the INS/GPS guidance in conjunction with differential GPS (using all 12 channel receivers, instead of only 5) corrections provided by
GPS SPO Accuracy Improvement Initiative (AII) and improved Target Location Error (TLE), it can achieve a 5-8m CEP. The submunition, with a smart fuse,
has been extensively tested against multi-layered targets by Wright Laboratory under the Hard Target Ordnance Program and Miniature Munitions
Technology Program. The length to diameter ratio and nose shape is designed to optimize penetration for a 50lb charge. This weapon is also a potential
payload for standoff carrier vehicles such as Tomahawk, JSOW, JASSM, Conventional ICBM, etc.

A 250 lb bomb is now able to achieve the destructive force of a 2000 lb bomb. Out of the 250 lb’s of bomb, only 50 lb is explosives. Pound for
pound, the ratio of destructive force to weight of explosive is inverse more and more with every new leap and discovery made in the NT field.

Self Replicating Nanomachines:

Self replicating nanobots are something we should consider. Though it would make manufacturing much easier, if able to replicate without impunity,
then the Grey Goo scenario becomes a real possibility. These nanobots will require a power source and raw material to reproduce. The material of which
these nanobots are comprised of is determinant in what raw materials can be used.

Classical molecular nanotechnology [2], 4] envisions nanomachines predominantly composed of carbon-rich diamondoid materials. Other useful
nanochemistries might employ aluminum-rich sapphire (Al2O3) materials, boron-rich (BN) or titanium-rich (TiC) materials, and the like. TiC has one the
highest possible operating temperatures allowed for commonplace materials (melting point ~3410°K [5]), and while diamond can scratch TiC, TiC can be
used to melt diamond.
However, atoms of Al, Ti and B are far more abundant in the Earth's crust (81,300 ppm, 4400 ppm and 3 ppm, respectively [5]) than in biomass, e.g.,
the human body (0.1 ppm, 0 ppm, and 0.03 ppm [6]), reducing the direct threat of ecophagy by such systems. On the other hand, carbon is a thousand
times less abundant in crustal rocks (320 ppm, mostly carbonates) than in the biosphere (~230,000 ppm).
Furthermore, conversion of the lithosphere into nanomachinery is not a primary concern because ordinary rocks typically contain relatively scarce
sources of energy. For instance, natural radioactive isotopes present in crustal rocks vary greatly as a function of the geological composition and
history of a region, but generally range from 0.15-1.40 mGy/yr [7], giving a raw power density of 0.28-2.6 ×10-7 W/m3 assuming crustal rocks of
approximately mean terrestrial density (5522 kg/m3 [5]).
This is quite insufficient to power nanorobots capable of significant activities; current nanomachine designs typically require power densities on the
order of 105-109 W/m3 to achieve effective results [6]. (Biological systems typically operate at 102-106 W/m3 [6].) Solar power is not readily
available below the surface, and the mean geothermal heat flow is only 0.05 W/m2 at the surface [6], just a tiny fraction of solar insolation.
Hypothesized crustal abiotic highly-reduced petroleum reserves [16] probably could not energize significant replicator nanomass growth due to the
anoxic environment deep underground, although potentially large geobacterial populations have been described [10-16] and in principle some unusual
though highly limited bacterial energy sources could also be tapped by nanorobots.

The Grey Goo Scenario is a theory that self replicating nanobots will reproduce in vast numbers and use the carbon base of our ecosphere to survive.
Leaving just a ‘Grey Goo’.

However, the primary ecophagic concern is that runaway nanorobotic replicators or "replibots" will convert the entire surface biosphere (the
ecology of all living things on the surface of the Earth) into alternative or artificial materials of some type--especially, materials like
themselves, e.g., more self-replicating nanorobots.
Since advanced nanorobots might be constructed predominantly of carbon-rich diamondoid materials [4], and since ~12% of all atoms in the human body
(representative of biology generally) are carbon atoms [6], or ~23% by weight, the global biological carbon inventory may support the self-manufacture
of a final mass of replicating diamondoid nanorobots on the order of ~0.23 Mbio, where Mbio is the total global biomass.
Unlike almost any other natural material, biomass can serve both as a source of carbon and as a source of power for nanomachine replication. Ecophagic
nanorobots would regard living things as environmental carbon accumulators, and biomass as a valuable ore to be mined for carbon and energy. Of
course, biosystems from which all carbon has been extracted can no longer be alive but would instead become lifeless chemical sludge.

Not exactly something to look forward to if this tech gets out of control.

These are both self explanatory. Let me propose a situation. The government has discovered genetic markers for every race of human. In their
discoveries, they have found a way to track that genetic marker with nanobots. Or the nanobots could be constructed in such a way that they track by
DNA. Let’s say you are looking for somebody in Dallas Texas. That is a HUGE city. Well, you release a few million of these nanobots at various
points in the city and they spread with the wind. Everyone in the city is scanned by these nanobots until eventually the person in question is located
and a signal sent to alert authorities to where this individual is. That is great for law enforcement, but this tech could result in a sever breach of
personal and civil rights if misused.

Radio frequency identification, or RFID, is a generic term for technologies that use radio waves to automatically identify objects such as
products in a store, or equipment used by a company. It also has applications for use within pets as well as people.

At the moment, there are devices no bigger than a grain of salt that are capable of sending a tracking signal.

So what ethic code should the government be following while researching this technology? Of course it is easy to say that they should be researching
it for peaceful purposes. There is much good that can be attained through NT research and development. But we are talking about the US
government/Military here. They do have a duty to uphold. That is the protection of America, its people and its constitution. So the question begs to
be asked; is it OK to pursue weaponized NT in the name of protection? This question is what it all boils down to. In order to answer this question, we
must first consider other questions.

Is the possibility of this tech getting in to the wrong hands worth the potential battlefield benefits that we will achieve?

Legislation would need to be introduced to address the safety of this technology. It would defiantly require some government regulation in order to
keep it out of the hands of unwanted people. But security, no matter how tight can be breached. We must also consider that we are not the only country
developing this technology. As we speak, France, Germany, India, Russia, UK, S. Africa, Australia, Japan, China and many other countries are
developing NT as well. We will not be able to regulate the whole world when it comes to the safety of NT. There could be treaties drawn up, but that
only goes so far. All a treaty would mean is you would have to move your research underground. Nuclear Technology has shown us that.

Is there any contingency plans worked up for the worst case scenario?

I searched for quite a while and I could find no type of contingency plan, or national emergency plan anywhere. I would have to say this is a direct
indicator that we are not prepared to deal with any emerging threat that deals with NT.

Is there a possibility this could be used against the American people by our own government?

This question is completely subjective to some people. But the fact is, we really don’t know just what our government has in store for us. We are
usually notified after the fact. Is there a possibility? I would have to say yes. Specifically, for tracking fugitives of the law. This question boils
down to; do you mind if a few hundred nanobots fly into your airways and take DNA samples of you without your knowledge? Personally, I don’t like
the idea.

If our protection is adequate now, will it still be 10, 20, 50 years from now? Will there be a need for the tech then?

Eventually, our technology existing technology will need to be replaced. In order to maintain an adequate defense of our country, its people, and the
Constitution, we will need to have some type of counter to the other countries who are producing these very same weapons we are researching today.
Yes, there will be a need for weapons platform upgrade in the future. Though the path of that upgrade will be addressed in the summary of this
presentation.

And the most important question for me; are we pursuing NT just to satisfy our human ego? Are we trying to play God because we can?

No researcher has ever directly answered this question when asked it. I think our Government is pursuing this research for two reasons. Because it
can, and because eventually, if we don’t pursue this field, we will be the only ones left without it, leaving us open to a NT attack of some
sort.

So, we have seen that it is possible for NT to get in to the wrong hands. There are no contingency plans for any NT contamination or attack scenario.
The possibility of our Government using NT against its citizens is apparent. Though our current weapons tech is adequate now, in the future, platform
upgrades will be necessary. Our Government does have the intention of keeping ahead of the pack on NT in order to maintain a defense to deture its use
against us. At least, this is the impression our military is making to congress.

ETHIC GUIDELINES:

The guidelines for NT should include provisions for emergency contingency plans before ever constructing self replicating nanobots. Safety and
security provisions should be included in the development of emergency contingency plans. First and foremost, this should be addressed as it poses the
most risk to humanity. Reproduction should be limited to a small number per bot. Every attempt should be made to have all nations participating in NT
research sign treaties that require disclosure of current NT. The development of NT weapons should include nonleathal and passive platforms. Defense
of NT should be highest priority over weaponization.

Foresight Institute and IMM have drafted a set of guidelines that they are hoping the entire NT industry adopts.
Nanotechnology Professional Guidelines

1. Nanotechnology developers adopt and practice professional guidelines relevant to the responsible development of both near term and advanced
nanotechnology.
2. Nanotechnologists attempt to consider proactively and systematically the environmental and health consequences of their specific technologies. They
recognize that the scope and magnitude of potential problems are reduced to the extent that they consider the possibilities, and plan to minimize
their effects.
3. Nanotechnology research and development is conducted with due regard to accepted principles and practices of environmental science and public
health, with the understanding that significant changes in physical and physiological properties may occur when macroscale materials are developed and
utilized on the nanoscale.
4. Nanotechnology products are conceived and developed using total product lifecycle analysis.
5. Molecular manufacturing system designs make no use of self-replicating machines.
6. When controversy exists concerning the theoretical feasibility or implementation timing of advanced molecular nanotechnologies, such as specialized
molecular manufacturing components or assemblers, researchers address and clarify the issues rapidly, and attempt to resolve any controversy
openly.
7. Any use of self-replicating systems is avoided except in approved and controlled circumstances.
8. Any developers who design or build self-replicating machines adopt systematic security measures to avoid unplanned distribution of their designs
and technical capabilities. Both potential benefits and risks of alternative technologies are explored actively, in a balanced and rigorous manner.

Nanotechnology Industry Guidelines
1. Industry self-regulation is practiced proactively, and tailored to the specific risk profile of the nanotechnology under development. For example,
carbon nanotubes should be developed with specialized industrial hygiene controls for particle inhalation or absorption risk. Toxicology studies
relating to nanomaterials should be advanced as rapidly as is feasible.
2. Self-replicating machines are distinguished from non-self-replicating manufacturing systems and end products.
3. When molecular manufacturing systems are designed or implemented, they use no self-replicating machines.
4. Any molecular manufacturing device designs specifically limit proliferation and provide traceability and audit trails.
5. Encrypted molecular manufacturing device instruction sets are utilized to discourage irresponsible proliferation and piracy.
6. Use of self-replicating systems is avoided except in approved and controlled circumstances.
7. Self-replicating machines (if any) have absolute requirements (e.g., for externally supplied information, interventions, environmental conditions,
materials, components, or exotic energy sources) that are available only where deliberately provided to enable operation of the machine. Thus,
self-replicating machines are designed to be incapable of replication in any natural environment.
8. Self-replicating machines (if any) are incapable of evolutionary change. For example, the information that specifies their construction is stored
and copied in encoded form, and the encoding is such that any error in copying randomizes and thus destroys the decoded information.

Government Policy Guidelines
1. Regulatory controls distinguish the wide variety of nanotechnologies, and recognize that their different risk profiles require different regulatory
policies. Nanomaterials and non-self-replicating nanotechnologies and their end products are distinguished from potentially self-replicating
technologies.
2. Regulations promulgated by researchers, industry, or government provide specific and clear guidelines, and encourage inherently safer designs for
nanotechnology and molecular manufacturing.
3. Regulators have specific responsibilities and authorities, for providing efficient and fair methods for identifying different classes of hazards,
providing approvals when necessary, and for carrying out inspection and enforcement. The goal is to provide the minimum effective regulatory
environment to ensure the safe and secure development of various forms of nanotechnology.
4. Economic incentives are provided through discounts on insurance policies for molecular manufacturing and development organizations that certify
Guidelines compliance. Willingness to provide self-regulation and open access for third party inspection that safeguards proprietary technology are a
condition to utilize advanced forms of molecular nanotechnology.
5. Access to non-self-replicating special purpose molecular manufacturing systems and products is unrestricted unless the special purpose capabilities
pose a specific risk.
6. The community of nations and non-governmental organizations practice an effective international means of restricting the deliberate misuse of
molecular nanotechnology. Such means should not restrict the development of non-self-replicating nanoscale materials, molecular manufacturing systems,
or defensive measures.
7. Accidental or willful misuse of nanotechnology is constrained by legal liability and, where appropriate, subject to criminal investigation and
prosecution.
8. Eventual distribution of self-replicating molecular manufacturing development capability is restricted, whenever possible, to responsible actors
that have agreed to practice these Guidelines. No such restriction need apply to special-purpose, non-self-replicating molecular machine systems, or
to the end products of molecular manufacturing that satisfy the Guidelines.
9. Governments, companies, and individuals who fail to follow reasonable principles and guidelines for development and dissemination of MNT are placed
at a substantial competitive disadvantage with respect to access to companies, collaborative organizations, R&D funding, plans, designs, software,
hardware, and cooperative market relationships.
10. Industry and government developers collaborate on continuous improvement and use of best practices in nanotechnology and risk management,
including the theory, mechanisms, and experimental designs for inherently safer molecular manufacturing, monitoring, and control systems.
11. Regulatory entities sponsor research on increasing the accuracy and fidelity of environmental models of nanotechnology and risk management, as
well as the theory, mechanisms, and experimental designs for built-in safeguards and advanced nanodevice defensive or immune systems.

If the Government can adopt these standards and keep what I have mentioned above in mind, and actually follow them, then I honestly believe
human kind could greatly benefit from the R and D of NT. The ethic of this subject is something that I believe each of us has to make our own decision
about. The decision will not be the same for all of us. There will be many opposing views on how the ethics of NT should be handled. Honestly, there
is no ‘one’ way to do anything. The ‘right’ way is relevant to our own perceptions on this subject. We will have to wait and see what Uncle
Sam has in store for us down the road when NT is more integrated into our daily lives. It is not a question of ‘if’ development occurs, but
‘when’ development occurs. Our Government will develop NT. They will weaponize it. We can only hope that they do so in a manner that will not be
harmful to America, or spread a virus like NT throughout the world.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.